Jump to content

Is Feminism Still Necessary?  

37 members have voted

  1. 1. Is the wage gap really caused by Systematic Gender Discrimination?

  2. 2. Is Rape Culture Real?

  3. 3. Is abortion a woman's right issue or a human's right issue?

    • Woman's Right issue
    • Human's Right issue


Recommended Posts

I'm just going to stick with my semi-pro-choice stance of taking everything on a case by case basis. I find the argument of "it has the potential to become a human being" a bit pointless, as then every post-adolescent woman would be committing murder every month, and every post-adolescent male about once every uh... day? I actually have never inquired into how often guys wash the ferret...

 

However, I do understand the concerns of the pro-life argument as well. In the end, I think a woman does absolutely have the right to terminate their pregnancy, as they are the ones bearing the child. Obviously there are some fucked up stories out there, but they are one-offs and absolutely not the norm. It's not correct to ban the right to abortion on the evidence of the actions of a few wankers, but at the same time I don't think it should be a casual occurrence. Better to educate on birth control first, but even that can fuck up.

 

I like to take the middle ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If people only put their kids up for adoption in cases of rape, etc. we'd have no problems. Honestly. All women who had been forced into pregnancy could easily find homes for their children. It's the men and women too lazy, apathetic, ignorant, and uncaring to use protection who get abortions that fuck everything up. In my opinion for those people who just couldn't be bothered to wear a condom/use birth control killing the mother is every bit as moral as killing the child. And I mean it. That's a sick way to live your life.

 

lmao are you serious? What if the condom broke? What if the pill didn't work? How can you honestly say that you might as well kill the mother because she wants to remove a fetus from inside her aka a possible child that she is in no way ready for either emotionally or physically?

 

Jesus you people think in such black and white terms.

 

 

I'm sorry, did I stutter when I said "too lazy to wear a condom or use birth control"? Because last time I checked, that was very different from an accident. Before jumping into an argument of this gravity you might taken a moment and check that you can come into it and use your brain, not your emotions. I really don't approve of having my speech misrepresented by people.

 

What I said was in cases in which the child is conceived due only to negligence I think killing the mother is just as moral. I'm not saying either one is moral; please don't confuse that and put words into my mouth. At the very, very least through the parents' negligence a living organism is killed. There's no debate about that. Whether you want to call it a person or not is up for debate, sure. But you have killed something. If you weren't killing something, then there wouldn't be an abortion to do. Taking away a living organism's "life" due to negligence is wrong in every single possible way, from every tenable moral standpoint. There's obviously some gray area when taking life; in battle, when you're in danger, things like that. But due to sheer negligence and lack of caring? No, I don't want to live in a world where that is acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to hear that coming from you, and a person is also a clump of cells so I suppose we cant murder them. It is wise for you to stop sticking up for those who are irresponsible because rape, the condom breaking, etc. is  not the primary reason for people having unwanted babies. It is because they have sex without thinking or using protection, and those that never want a baby still don't go through the procedure to fix the problem.

 

But people have thinking minds, they are alive and breathing, not a clump taking up space inside another living being.

 

And thats a mighty big assumption on why people get abortions. Got a citation? A source? Or are you just dribbling over false claims in order to have a flimsy point at best?

 

And if I'm reading you correctly, even if the condom broke or birth control filed the woman should be FORCED to have the child? Do you know the ordeals that go with child birth or getting an abortion for that matter? You think people walk in smiling ear to ear ready for their weekly abortion and a lollipop from Dr.Anti Christ? How sheltered are you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just going to stick with my semi-pro-choice stance of taking everything on a case by case basis. I find the argument of "it has the potential to become a human being" a bit pointless, as then every post-adolescent woman would be committing murder every month, and every post-adolescent male about once every uh... day? I actually have never inquired into how often guys wash the ferret...

 

However, I do understand the concerns of the pro-life argument as well. In the end, I think a woman does absolutely have the right to terminate their pregnancy, as they are the ones bearing the child. Obviously there are some fucked up stories out there, but they are one-offs and absolutely not the norm. It's not correct to ban the right to abortion on the evidence of the actions of a few wankers, but at the same time I don't think it should be a casual occurrence. Better to educate on birth control first, but even that can fuck up.

 

I like to take the middle ground.

 

Both the "potential" argument and yours have a flaw in that regard. Sperm and egg on their own don't have the potential to become anything. They solely have that potential when combined. In cases of potential, there is no loss per say entailed. In other words, when taking away potential nothing has truly "left." But you could use that same reason to justify murder of an adult human being. If there's no value in potential then surely murdering humans is fine, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't want to hear that coming from you, and a person is also a clump of cells so I suppose we cant murder them. It is wise for you to stop sticking up for those who are irresponsible because rape, the condom breaking, etc. is  not the primary reason for people having unwanted babies. It is because they have sex without thinking or using protection, and those that never want a baby still don't go through the procedure to fix the problem.

 

But people have thinking minds, they are alive and breathing, not a clump taking up space inside another living being.

 

And thats a mighty big assumption on why people get abortions. Got a citation? A source? Or are you just dribbling over false claims in order to have a flimsy point at best?

 

And if I'm reading you correctly, even if the condom broke or birth control filed the woman should be FORCED to have the child? Do you know the ordeals that go with child birth or getting an abortion for that matter? You think people walk in smiling ear to ear ready for their weekly abortion and a lollipop from Dr.Anti Christ? How sheltered are you? 

 

 

Should human beings be FORCED to care for invalids? The elderly? Fuck, I'm forced to pay for welfare for people who scam the U.S. government and won't work a day in their lives, while in the mean time I can barely put food on the table for my family some months. We're all FORCED into some parts of life; drawing the line there is senseless. There are plenty of legitimate arguments for abortion, but this is not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm sorry, did I stutter when I said "too lazy to wear a condom or use birth control"? Because last time I checked, that was very different from an accident. Before jumping into an argument of this gravity you might taken a moment and check that you can come into it and use your brain, not your emotions. I really don't approve of having my speech misrepresented by people.

 

What I said was in cases in which the child is conceived due only to negligence I think killing the mother is just as moral. I'm not saying either one is moral; please don't confuse that and put words into my mouth. At the very, very least through the parents' negligence a living organism is killed. There's no debate about that. Whether you want to call it a person or not is up for debate, sure. But you have killed something. If you weren't killing something, then there wouldn't be an abortion to do. Taking away a living organism's "life" due to negligence is wrong in every single possible way, from every tenable moral standpoint. There's obviously some gray area when taking life; in battle, when you're in danger, things like that. But due to sheer negligence and lack of caring? No, I don't want to live in a world where that is acceptable.

 

I never put words in your mouth though? I asked if you were serious about your "might as well kill the woman" statement then asked two questions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never put words in your mouth though? I asked if you were serious about your "might as well kill the woman" statement then asked two questions. 

 

 

Excuse me, please take responsibility for what you say:

 

 

 

 

 

What if the condom broke? What if the pill didn't work?

 

 

 

If people only put their kids up for adoption in cases of rape, etc. we'd have no problems. Honestly. All women who had been forced into pregnancy could easily find homes for their children. It's the men and women too lazy, apathetic, ignorant, and uncaring to use protection who get abortions that fuck everything up. In my opinion for those people who just couldn't be bothered to wear a condom/use birth control killing the mother is every bit as moral as killing the child. And I mean it. That's a sick way to live your life.

 

If I really have to clarify: Being too lazy to use a condom does not equal NOT using a condom. And those questions clearly misrepresent my point. I already said earlier in this debate that those circumstances are outside the norm, and that there are clearly gray areas.

 

 

How can you honestly say that you might as well kill the mother because she wants to remove a fetus from inside her aka a possible child that she is in no way ready for either emotionally or physically?

 

 

 

 

If people only put their kids up for adoption in cases of rape, etc. we'd have no problems. Honestly. All women who had been forced into pregnancy could easily find homes for their children. It's the men and women too lazy, apathetic, ignorant, and uncaring to use protection who get abortions that fuck everything up. In my opinion for those people who just couldn't be bothered to wear a condom/use birth control killing the mother is every bit as moral as killing the child. And I mean it. That's a sick way to live your life.

 

 

If I really have to clarify: I didn't say "we should kill the mother," I said "[it] is every bit as moral as killing the child." You clearly stated that I said we should kill the mother. You've misrepresented my arguments in an attempt to invalidate my argument by way of changing my point of view and making me look like a crazy extremist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean that,

 

1) The argument that killing a fetus is taking away "potential" is somewhat false because potential doesn't exist. It's just a concept, and

 

2) Your argument is flawed because if you're saying that potential is worthless, then killing humans should be okay, too, because their future is meaningless (being, after all, only potential).

 

Both arguments are faulty in some way; there's no possible way to resolve this part of the argument with use of logic. Both sides must accept that they are partially wrong from a moral and logical standpoint and accept that it's a gray area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean that,

 

1) The argument that killing a fetus is taking away "potential" is somewhat false because potential doesn't exist. It's just a concept, and

 

2) Your argument is flawed because if you're saying that potential is worthless, then killing humans should be okay, too, because their future is meaningless (being, after all, only potential).

 

Both arguments are faulty in some way; there's no possible way to resolve this part of the argument with use of logic. Both sides must accept that they are partially wrong from a moral and logical standpoint and accept that it's a gray area.

Oh I see! I hadn't thought of it that way. Flawed argument indeed, will not use again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse me, please take responsibility for what you say:

The questions were not directed towards your response. Like, I don't know how to explain that better. They were general questions so I could better understand your stance. And I have no idea how my second statement has any relation to what you quoted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I see! I hadn't thought of it that way. Flawed argument indeed, will not use again.

 

 

It's one of those funny things in moral/religious/ethical/philosophical discussions that doesn't come up much, because the ramifications of saying either "potential is worthless" or "potential is value" absolutely kind of wrecks everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll boil it down even more pixel.

 

 

 

How can you say that you might as well kill the mother...

 

I never said this. Not even a little bit. Never even remotely insinuated that we should kill the mother. It was simply a comparison in morality. You are clearly misrepresenting what I'm trying to say, albeit in a very crafty manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't want to hear that coming from you, and a person is also a clump of cells so I suppose we cant murder them. It is wise for you to stop sticking up for those who are irresponsible because rape, the condom breaking, etc. is  not the primary reason for people having unwanted babies. It is because they have sex without thinking or using protection, and those that never want a baby still don't go through the procedure to fix the problem.

 

But people have thinking minds, they are alive and breathing, not a clump taking up space inside another living being.

 

And thats a mighty big assumption on why people get abortions. Got a citation? A source? Or are you just dribbling over false claims in order to have a flimsy point at best?

 

And if I'm reading you correctly, even if the condom broke or birth control filed the woman should be FORCED to have the child? Do you know the ordeals that go with child birth or getting an abortion for that matter? You think people walk in smiling ear to ear ready for their weekly abortion and a lollipop from Dr.Anti Christ? How sheltered are you? 

 

A fetus will have a thinking mind, Do you want me to pull up a biased source from one of the sides, would that make you happy, because I can do that but I can tell you right now most polls aren't accurate or are biased in one way or another ESPECIALLY in matters like this. "And if I'm reading you correctly" you aren't, please show me were I said that.

 

Since you seem to get be the abortion expert why don't you enlighten me on why most people get them?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it may eventually have a thinking mind. I don't think the whole concept of human reproduction is in question here . . .

 

So much fun, comparing the Future to the Present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we all please just take a breathe and make sure we're arguing with thoughts rather than feelings? This is a touchy subject, and I'm not gonna have it devolve into name calling and stereotyping. If you guys want it to continue, please let it stay civil and clearly reply to the points the person is making, not points that you've heard from others before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fetus will have a thinking mind, Do you want me to pull up a biased source from one of the sides, would that make you happy, because I can do that but I can tell you right now most polls aren't accurate or are biased in one way or another ESPECIALLY in matters like this. "And if I'm reading you correctly" you aren't, please show me were I said that.

 

Since you seem to get be the abortion expert why don't you enlighten me on why most people get them?

 

 

Yes, facts and cited sources make me happy. And forced may have been the wrong word. Obligated is better. And even if the fetus will have a thinking mind when its in the developmental fetus stage it is apart of the woman and I think she has every right to abort it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, facts and cited sources make me happy. And forced may have been the wrong word. Obligated is better. And even if the fetus will have a thinking mind when its in the developmental fetus stage it is apart of the woman and I think she has every right to abort it or not.

 

 

Does location relative to another person affect morality? If you can admit that they're a thinking person, then how does it being inside the woman make it any more right to kill it than if it was outside the mother? Or just a person near the mother? Do we kill for convenience? If I was having kidney failure, I wouldn't kill you so I could live. And in cases where the mother isn't in any danger I can't see how the living, thinking being inside her has any less right to live than you would if I needed a kidney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A fetus will have a thinking mind, Do you want me to pull up a biased source from one of the sides, would that make you happy, because I can do that but I can tell you right now most polls aren't accurate or are biased in one way or another ESPECIALLY in matters like this. "And if I'm reading you correctly" you aren't, please show me were I said that.

 

Since you seem to get be the abortion expert why don't you enlighten me on why most people get them?

 

 

Yes, facts and cited sources make me happy. And forced may have been the wrong word. Obligated is better. And even if the fetus will have a thinking mind when its in the developmental fetus stage it is apart of the woman and I think she has every right to abort it or not.

 

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/reasonsabortions.html

 

  - Feels unready for child/responsibility 25%        - Feels she can't afford baby 23%        - Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities 19%        - Relationship problem/Single motherhood 8%        - Feels she isn't mature enough 7%        - Interference with education/career plans 4%        - Parents/Partner wants abortion <1%        - Other reasons <6.5%      TOTAL: 93%

(Approx.)

   "Hard Cases" (given as primary reason)          - Mother's Health 4%        - Baby may have health problem 3%        - Rape or Incest <0.5%         

    TOTAL:

 

7%

(Approx.)

 

 

The majority of those are due to being irresponsible with only rape and the mothers health being unforseeable or possibly understandable (<4.5%) as the others such as those with interference with educational plans could have just not had sex knowing it has potential to make a baby or put a condom on or If you knew you didn't want any more kids then, as I have said before, get the procedure done so you don't have any more.

 

the amount of time a condom fails is extremely low  http://www.hamovhotov.com/health/?p=155

"These trials have shown that correct and consistent use of condoms can have between 95% and 98% contraceptive efficacy rate."

 

that rate of efficiency isn't even including if a women takes birth control.

 

EDIT: Most people simply don't use contraceptives. http://www.statisticbrain.com/birth-control-statistics/

 

Contraceptive Percent Used The Pill 28% Sterilization 27.1% Condom 16.1% Vasectomy 9.9% IUD 5.5%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Does location relative to another person affect morality? If you can admit that they're a thinking person, then how does it being inside the woman make it any more right to kill it than if it was outside the mother? Or just a person near the mother? Do we kill for convenience? If I was having kidney failure, I wouldn't kill you so I could live. And in cases where the mother isn't in any danger I can't see how the living, thinking being inside her has any less right to live than you would if I needed a kidney.

 

A fetus doesn't start developing a brain until the 6th/8th week so it is not thinking. Now I most definitely do not agree with getting an abortion whenever during the pregnancy because the abortion may just end up damaging the child instead of terminating it, but somewhere around the first month and a half I feel is completely fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Does location relative to another person affect morality? If you can admit that they're a thinking person, then how does it being inside the woman make it any more right to kill it than if it was outside the mother? Or just a person near the mother? Do we kill for convenience? If I was having kidney failure, I wouldn't kill you so I could live. And in cases where the mother isn't in any danger I can't see how the living, thinking being inside her has any less right to live than you would if I needed a kidney.

 

A fetus doesn't start developing a brain until the 6th/8th week so it is not thinking. Now I most definitely do not agree with getting an abortion whenever during the pregnancy because the abortion may just end up damaging the child instead of terminating it, but somewhere around the first month and a half I feel is completely fine.

 

 

More or less; basic anatomical structures of the brain being in place might not indicate the capacity to think, but it's good place to start.

 

Of course proximity to others matters when it comes to morality, if you really really want to push the issue and make me call "being pregnant" being "trespassed against." Some certainly have tried it, calling the condition a parasitic infection, and claiming that through the use of the placenta, the "parasite" is hidden from detection by the immune response of the body.

This is the exact opposite of the majority of people don't use contraceptives: "Among those who don’t, 31% are pregnant, trying to get pregnant, postpartum, sterile or not sexually active. The other 7% take their chances. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  - Feels unready for child/responsibility 25%        - Feels she can't afford baby 23%        - Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities 19%        - Relationship problem/Single motherhood 8%        - Feels she isn't mature enough 7%        - Interference with education/career plans 4%

How are these not completely valid reasons for not having a child? 

 

And as for this:

 

 

as the others such as those with interference with educational plans could have just not had sex knowing it has potential to make a baby or put a condom on or If you knew you didn't want any more kids then, as I have said before, get the procedure done so you don't have any more.

A woman can change her mind about having children and shouldn't have to go through procedures. What about the 18 year olds in college? Should they  do the procedures as well just in case their birth control or condoms doesn't work? 

 

And about that source you posted about condoms was kinda garbage. It didn't cite anything and when I looked up the author of the article I needed to sign in to a website to see his profile.

 

 

 

that rate of efficiency isn't even including if a women takes birth control.

My Mother had both my sister and I on birth control. My Step Father had all 4 of his children on it as well. Shit fails sometimes, man.

 

Oh, hey. My 100th post. toot toot.

Edited by Pixel Bombs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

  - Feels unready for child/responsibility 25%        - Feels she can't afford baby 23%        - Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities 19%        - Relationship problem/Single motherhood 8%        - Feels she isn't mature enough 7%        - Interference with education/career plans 4%

How are these not completely valid reasons for not having a child? 

 

And as for this:

 

 

as the others such as those with interference with educational plans could have just not had sex knowing it has potential to make a baby or put a condom on or If you knew you didn't want any more kids then, as I have said before, get the procedure done so you don't have any more.

A woman can change her mind about having children and shouldn't have to go through procedures. What about the 18 year olds in college? Should they  do the procedures as well just in case their birth control or condoms doesn't work? 

 

And about that source you posted about condoms was kinda garbage. It didn't cite anything and when I looked up the author of the article I needed to sign in to a website to see his profile.

 

 

 

that rate of efficiency isn't even including if a women takes birth control.

My Mother had both my sister and I on birth control. My Step Father had all 4 of his children on it as well. Shit fails sometimes, man.

 

1. I'm going to call BS on your family info .

2. you not wanting to sign in doesn't invalidate anything.

3.They aren't valid reasons because below I cited how effective contraceptives are when used and how often they aren't used meaning most of them didn't use them and it is irresponsible to say well i'm not mature enough to have a baby, should have thought of that before you decided to have sex and forgo a condom and birth control which really aren't that expensive or hard to get a hold of, even a teen can buy condoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They aren't valid reasons because below I cited how effective contraceptives are when used and how often they aren't used meaning most of them didn't use them and it is irresponsible to say well i'm not mature enough to have a baby, should have thought of that before you decided to have sex and forgo a condom and birth control which really aren't that expensive.

 

 

 

 

This is the exact opposite of the majority of people don't use contraceptives: "Among those who don’t, 31% are pregnant, trying to get pregnant, postpartum, sterile or not sexually active. The other 7% take their chances. "

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...